Citation Nr: 9837084
Decision Date: 12/21/98 Archive Date: 12/30/98
DOCKET NO. 96-27 366 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Waco, Texas
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to service connection for post traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD).
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
Robin M. Webb, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran had active service from September 1967 to August
1969.
This appeal arises before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(Board) from a rating action of the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Waco, Texas, which
denied the veteran’s claim of entitlement to service
connection for PTSD.
CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL
The veteran contends that he is entitled to service
connection for PTSD. Specifically, he asserts that he was
involved in several firefights while he was assigned to the
12th Infantry during the Tet Offensive.
DECISION OF THE BOARD
The Board, in accordance with the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A.
§ 7104 (West 1991 & Supp. 1998), has reviewed and considered
all of the evidence and material of record in the veteran's
claims file. Based on its review of the relevant evidence in
this matter, and for the following reasons and bases, it is
the decision of the Board that the veteran has not submitted
a well grounded claim of entitlement to service connection
for PTSD.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The record contains no evidence of a verified, or
verifiable, in-service stressor, upon which the diagnosis of
PTSD is based.
2. The record contains no competent medical evidence of a
causal nexus between the veteran’s diagnosed PTSD and his
claimed in-service stressor.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
The claim of entitlement to service connection for PTSD is
not well grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 5107(a) (West 1991).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
I. Pertinent Law and Regulations
A veteran claiming entitlement to VA benefits has the burden
of submitting evidence sufficient to justify a belief by a
fair and impartial individual that the claim is well
grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a). A well grounded claim is
a plausible claim, capable of substantiation. Tirpak v.
Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 609, 611 (1992). A well grounded
claim requires more than allegations that the veteran’s
service, or an incident which occurred therein, resulted in
injury, illness, or death. The veteran must submit
supporting evidence that would justify the belief that the
claim is a plausible one. See Tirpak, 2 Vet. App. at 609.
Where a claim is not well grounded, VA does not have a
statutory duty to assist the veteran further in the
development of his claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a).
Specifically, the United States Court of Veterans Appeals
(Court) has held that the three elements of a well grounded
claim of service connection for PTSD are: 1) a current,
clear medical diagnosis of PTSD; 2) credible supporting
evidence that the claimed in-service stressor actually
occurred; and 3) medical evidence of a causal nexus between
current symptomatology and the specific claimed in-service
stressor. Cohen v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 128, 129 (1997).
Adjudication of well grounded claims of service connection
for PTSD requires evaluation of the evidence in light of
places, types, and circumstances of service, as indicated by
service records, the official history of each organization in
which the veteran served, the veteran’s military records, and
all pertinent medical and lay evidence. 38 U.S.C.A.
§ 1154(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303(a), 3.304(f)
(1998); Cohen, 10 Vet. App. at 129.
Service connection for PTSD requires medical evidence
establishing a clear diagnosis of the condition, credible
supporting evidence that the claimed inservice stressor
actually occurred, and a link between current symptomatology
and the claimed inservice stressor. If the claimed stressor
is related to combat, service department evidence that the
veteran was awarded the Purple Heart, Combat Infantryman
Badge, or similar combat citation will be accepted, in the
absence of evidence to the contrary, as conclusive evidence
of the claimed inservice stressor. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f)
(1994).
Where the determinative issue involves medical causation or a
medical diagnosis, competent medical evidence that the claim
is plausible is required. Grottveit v. Brown, 5 Vet. App.
91, 93 (1993). However, the Board is not bound to accept
diagnoses and opinions by physicians who base a diagnosis of
PTSD solely upon the veteran’s unsupported statements. See
Black v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 177 (1993); see also Swann v.
Brown, 5 Vet. App. 229 (1993). Nor is the Board bound to
accept the veteran’s uncorroborated accounts of in-service
stressors or the opinions or diagnoses by physicians who rely
on the veteran’s account of his stressful military service.
Id.
Controlling law provides that service connection may be
established for disability resulting from personal injury or
disease incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C.A.
§ 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303(a), 3.304(f).
II. Factual Background
The pertinent evidence of record consists of the veteran’s
service records, After Action Reports detailing activities of
the 1st Battalion, 12th Infantry (Red Warriors) while the
veteran was in Vietnam, the veteran’s Social Security
Administration (SSA) disability benefits records, VA
outpatient treatment records (dated from December 1992 to
June 1967), and statements made by the veteran and his spouse
throughout this claims process.
The veteran’s service records show that he was a cook while
assigned to the Headquarters Co., 1st Battalion, 12th
Infantry. There is no combat involvement indicated or noted.
The After Action Reports document activities by the 1st
Battalion, 12th Infantry, from February to May 1969.
Headquarters Co. was not specifically discussed, as to
firefights and enemy engagement, nor was an incident similar
to the one reported by the veteran, i.e., the destruction of
a mess hall, noted. There was also no mention of the veteran
having participated in the Reconnaissance Platoon.
The veteran’s SSA records are silent as to his service in
Vietnam and any diagnosis of PTSD. The diagnosis on the
September 1993 psychiatric examination was organic brain
syndrome, secondary to alcohol abuse, and alcohol dependency,
by history. He was awarded disability benefits due to mental
retardation/organic brain syndrome and chronic back and leg
pain/degenerative disc disease.
The VA outpatient treatment records indicate that the veteran
was referred for a PTSD evaluation in August 1993, following
reports of flashbacks and depression. A psychiatric
consultation sheet (dated in February 1994) noted traumatic
stress disorder under complaints and findings. An additional
psychiatric consultation sheet (dated in October 1995) listed
both PTSD and anxiety as the provisional diagnosis. Progress
notes (dated in November 1995) listed the veteran as
complaining of flashbacks and his seeming to be back in
Vietnam in his dreams. It was also noted that the veteran
appeared to meet the “lifetime criteria” for PTSD. The
assessment was PTSD, with prominent symptom of nightmares.
Statements by the veteran indicate that he was involved in
many firefights while stationed in Vietnam, even though he
was a cook. The veteran also stated that he witnessed a mess
hall being blown up during one of these firefights. He also
reported witnessing many deaths.
Statements by the veteran’s spouse reflect her belief that
the veteran will never be the same man who went to Vietnam.
They also reflect the veteran’s reports, as told to her, that
while he may have been just a cook, he was on the front
lines, although he could not remember where he was over in
Vietnam.
III. Analysis
The Board recognizes the veteran’s contention that he is
entitled to service connection for PTSD. However, the Board
must adhere to established laws and regulations in its
determinations. As such, given the evidence of record, the
veteran’s claim must be denied, as it is not well grounded.
Specifically, the record contains neither supporting evidence
of the veteran’s claimed in-service stressors nor medical
evidence of a causal nexus between the veteran’s PTSD and a
claimed in-service stressor. Here, the record is completely
negative for any corroborating evidence that the veteran’s
claimed in-service stressors occurred. Indeed, the record
contains only the veteran’s assertions and those of his
spouse as to any specific in-service stressor. In this
regard, the Board is not bound to accept the veteran’s
uncorroborated accounts of in-service stressors. See Black
v. Brown, supra; see also Swann v. Brown, supra. Further,
although the record reflects a diagnosis of PTSD, it is not
predicated on any referenced in-service stressor. There is
no medical opinion or discussion relating the veteran’s PTSD
to his service or any stressor experienced therein. The
record reflects no basis for the veteran’s current diagnosis
of PTSD, within the context of Vietnam. At most, VA
outpatient treatment records note that the veteran complained
of nightmares and dreams where the veteran appeared to be
back in Vietnam. As such, there simply is no medical
evidence of a causal nexus.
Therefore, absent both credible supporting evidence that a
claimed in-service stressor actually occurred and medical
evidence of a causal nexus between the specific claimed in-
service stressor and the veteran’s PTSD, the veteran has not
submitted a well grounded claim of service connection for
PTSD. See Cohen v. Brown, supra. The veteran’s claim must,
then, be denied. Application of the rule regarding benefit
of reasonable doubt is not required, as the veteran has not
met his burden of submitting a well grounded claim.
38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(b) (West 1991).
The Board notes that the veteran was put on notice as to the
evidence required to support his claim in the October 1995
rating decision and in the statement of the case (dated in
May 1996), as he was informed that absent a verifiable in-
service stressor, there was no basis to grant service
connection for PTSD. The veteran also has not provided any
indication of the existence of additional evidence that would
make his claim well grounded. See Epps v. Gober, 126 F.3d
1464 (Fed. Cir. 1997); Robinette v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 69
(1995). Absent a well grounded claim, the VA has no duty to
assist the veteran in development of his claim. 38 U.S.C.A.
§ 5107(a).
ORDER
Entitlement to service connection for PTSD is denied.
V. L. Jordan
Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals
NOTICE OF APPELLATE RIGHTS: Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7266 (West
1991 & Supp. 1998), a decision of the Board granting less
than the complete benefit, or benefits, sought on appeal is
appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals
(Court) within 120 days from the date of mailing of notice of
the decision, provided that a Notice of Disagreement
concerning an issue which was before the Board was filed with
the agency of original jurisdiction on or after November 18,
1988. Veterans' Judicial Review Act, Pub. L. No. 100-687,
§ 402, 102 Stat. 4105, 4122 (1988). The date which appears
on the face of this decision constitutes the date of mailing
and the copy of this decision which you have received is your
notice of the action taken on your appeal by the Board of
Veterans' Appeals.
- 2 -